1,067 Actions

What can we infer from the different nativity accounts in Matthew and Luke?I certainly encourage you to stay, but our Site Directives state that we are not a "Christian" site, therefore we allow other POV's as long as they "take the text seriously". I didn't believe the answer in question did, but we must maintain civility at all times, respecting the rights of others to express their views, and give the benefit of the doubt to those who disagree. On this site, the strength of our evidence outweighs the strength of our convictions.

Jul6

comment

What can we infer from the different nativity accounts in Matthew and Luke?I voted +1 to encourage you, you appear to have some skills which may prove beneficial to this site. However, your tone and demeanor need to change before this becomes the kind of answer we're looking for. If you remove the prescriptive(ie:'preachy') statements and just "state the facts", supporting your conclusions, your contributions will find a greater degree of acceptance. Thank you!

What can we infer from the different nativity accounts in Matthew and Luke?@DickHarfield itself, yet reconciling them with the details of the fulfillment of numerous prophecies which were fulfilled. Modernists, who've devalued any prophecy are attempting to 're-create' historical events based on their 'critical sources', error in judging 'anomalies' as reasons to discredit traditional sources, and instead impose their 'agnostic', post-modern worldview-discrediting the Scriptures themselves, reducing them to a collection of 'moral sayings', and taking away the very source of their impact, which is Divine inspiration,

Jul6

comment

What can we infer from the different nativity accounts in Matthew and Luke?@DickHarfield Textual criticism aside. this is where I part company with Modern Critical scholarship. In an attempt to 're-create' an account from 'unbiased' historical sources, they totally ignore the fact that those sources themselves are biased; being slanted from a pagan, agnostic, or antagonistic view. The writers of Matthew and Luke have different sources, but paint the same picture, albeit with some anomalies given from the points of perspective of those giving the accounts. The Early Church fathers reconciled these anomalies by different accounts; giving credence to the account(con.'t)

Jul3

comment

Who is the Prince of Tyre?@MarkEdward,@ScottS I attempted to more clearly lay out a pattern of understanding; we could also see "the Woman's seed, vs the Serpent's seed" if you want to satisfy the concern of "anachronism".

Genesis 11:7 - Babel language confusion@fdb The point being-the commentary I posted provides a serious exposition in answering the question; dealing with linguistic issues as well as dealing with the related arguments the OP presented. You can always post another answer.

What is the correct translation and meaning of Matt. 11:19?I gave it a +1-you answered both questions. The Whole Point of this exercise is why I prefer KJV(based on the TR), over the NIV. You see the same passage with the same meanings in both accounts; the NIV conflates them, and wants you to 'vote' on the result.(IMO).....;>)

Jun24

comment

What is the correct translation and meaning of Matt. 11:19?My question 1st asked for the meaning of the passage, then the reason for the TR texts being the same, but not the Nestle Alland. FWIW someone else(not me) put the "textual critical" tag to it. I'm not against 'Textual Criticism' per se,(I am against Modern Textual Criticism). It is a tool in your toolbox, but it isn't the only tool; furthermore, one can be led astray by it, if one uses it at the expense of all other means. On your #3, the children didn't refuse, those that had better things to do with their time, did. Wisdom is understood by understanding the children.